634 PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL MUSEUM. vol.59. 



end and several millimeters of the lower. On comparison with the 

 same part of a specimen of C. latrans from Nebraska no differences 

 are observed. The enamel of the canine tooth has been weathered 

 somewhat, but the tooth appears not to have differed from the same 

 tooth of a coyote from Fort Kearney, Nebraska. 



Family HYAENIDAE. 



In the Anita collection there are two bones (Cat. No. 10223) which 

 the writer regards as having belonged to one specimen of some car- 

 nivorous animal; these are parts of the left ramus of one or two lower 

 jaws. The principal fragment is that which bore the last premolar 

 and the first molar, together with the lower border of the jaw, ex- 

 tending back to the condyle and the angle (pi. 124, figs. 5, 6). This 

 was at first regarded with some doubt as having belonged to a large 

 species of Felis. Unfortunately the crowns of the teeth are gone, 

 but the roots remain; also a slight part of the grinding surface of 

 the rear of the fourth premolar. In front of the fourth premolar 

 there is preserved a small patch of the hinder wall of the socket for 

 the hinder root of the third premolar. This root seems to have been 

 about as large as the anterior root of the fourth premolar. 



The other fragment mentioned belonged to a left ramus, and pre- 

 sents the hinder wall of the socket for the canine, and for three roots 

 of premolars (pi. 124, figs. 5, 6, upper end). As to these premolars, 

 it was at first a question whether the second root belonged to the first 

 premolar present or to the second. An examination of the wall of 

 bone between two premolars of a dog or large felid shows that both of 

 its faces are quite uniformly concave. On the other hand, the wall 

 that separates two roots of a premolar has its two faces nearly flat; 

 while in the middle of each face there is a more or less distinct ridge. 

 Each ridge fits into a slight groove on the corresponding face of the 

 root. Now in the fragment under consideration the bone which 

 separates the two roots present indicates distinctly that they belong 

 to one tooth; while the bony septum next behind shows as conclu- 

 sively that it separated two different teeth. We find, therefore, that 

 the premolar succeeding the canine had two roots. We must now 

 determine whether either or both of the fragments belonged probably 

 to a felid or to some other group. The anterior fragment will be 

 first considered. 



(a) The diastema between the canine and the first premolar present 

 measures only 10 mm. In a lion jaw at hand this measures 31 mm.; 

 in a tiger, 26 mm. However, in a few cats, as the puma, this is short; 

 in the puma, only about 10 mm. (6) In the cats there are usually 

 two or more mental foramina; one, large or small, beneath the ante- 

 rior premolar (pm. 3), the others in front of it. (c) In the fossil bone 

 there is a large foramen below the hinder root of the anterior pre- 



